LIMNOLOGY STUDY OF CEDAR LAKE 2015 BRISTOL ...LIMNOLOGY STUDY OF CEDAR LAKE 2015 BRISTOL AND WOLCOTT, CT Alberto F. Mimo The Northeast Naturalist Services 55 Talmadge Hill Rd. Prospect,

The Northeast Naturalist Services Page 0

LIMNOLOGY STUDY OF CEDAR LAKE

2015

BRISTOL AND WOLCOTT, CT

Alberto F. Mimo

The Northeast Naturalist Services

55 Talmadge Hill Rd.

Prospect, CT 06712

Prepared for the

Cedar Lake Owners Association, Inc

Bristol and Wolcott, CT

October 1st, 2015


Introduction to this Project

Introduction to the QAPP (Quality Assurance Project Plan)

Before the start of this project an initial meeting with members of the Cedar Lake Owner Association was

scheduled and as a result of our discussions a Quality Assurance Project Plan was designed and written to

provide the Association and The Northeast Naturalist Services with information and quality control

details for the project.

When starting a monitoring program a QAPP is always recommended so that the project includes all the

elements that are required and needed. It also provides the interested parties with the procedures to be

followed and sets procedures for the work to be done that follow a quality control protocol as

recommended by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection and the US

Environmental Protection Agency using rigorous scientific methods and materials.

A number of additional tests and procedures were added to the project during the summer to answer some

additional questions that came up and were of concern. All these added procedures followed approved

requirements that are standard methods in limnology in the scientific world and are not included in the

QAPP.

I have included as part of the appendix a copy of the Quality Control Project Plan written for this project.


Results of the study

Physical Information of Cedar Lake

Lake Surface Area and Drainage Basin System

Cedar Lake is located in the towns of Bristol and Wolcott in the state of Connecticut. See figure 1.

Figure 1. General Map of Cedar Lake.

The lake has a surface area of 135 acres and is part of the Mad River drainage basin system. The local

drainage area around the lake has an extension of 573 acres. The entire Mad River Sub Regional Drainage

area has a total of 13,023 acres. The lake area comprises 23 percent of the adjacent drainage basin area

and 1 percent of the Mad River sub regional drainage area. As a consequence, the size of the local

drainage area around the lake has very little influence on the lake and the lake adds virtually insignificant

influence to the entire drainage system.

In addition the adjacent drainage area of Cedar Lake is mostly wooded and not densely developed except

for around the lake. The Lake is located at the highest elevation of the Mad River Sub Regional drainage

system. No major rivers or streams flow into the lake. See Figure 2.


Figure 2. Map of the entire Sub Regional Drainage area for the Mad River.

I have compared Cedar Lake and Mad River Drainage areas to a nearby lake in the town of Wolcott. For

that purpose I have chosen Hitchcock Lake with a surface are of 99 acres and a Drainage Area of 321

acres located in the same Mad River Sub Regional Drainage Area. The ratio of lake surface to drainage

area is 31 percent and the ratio of total drainage area to surface area is about .75 percent. Both lakes,

Cedar Lake and Hitchcock Lake are proportionally similar but Cedar Lake is at a the highest elevation of

the Sub Regional drainage system where very few contaminants could affect the lake, while Hitchcock

Lake is not. Lake Hitchcock is lower in elevation and more susceptible to contamination. While both

lakes are similar in size, Cedar Lake is in a better geographical position to be a cleaner lake. Its position,

highest on the drainage system, imply great differences between them. See Figure 4 and 5. Septic systems

around the lake and construction of new homes or restorations of old ones may have an important

influence on the ecological conditions of the lake.


Figure 3. Hitchcock Lake local drainage basin.

Geographical and Drainage Differences between Both Lakes.

Figure 5. Comparison between Cedar Lake and Lake Hitchcock Surface Area and Drainage System

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Lake SurfaceArea X.10

Lake's DrainageArea X.10

Total DrainageArea X.1000

Ratio 1 Ratio 2

Cedar Lake

Hitchcock Lake


Bathymetric implications

Cedar Lake is a very shallow lake, having a maximum depth of no more than 3.5 meters and an average

depth of just 2 meters. This makes the lake behave as a large wetland populated on its littoral area by

aquatic vegetation. Macrophytes or plants around a lake, in shallow lakes, provide a water quality buffer

by absorbing nutrients and other contaminants. It is recommended that these plants should cover an area

of better than 20 percent of the lake surface area to provide this buffer.

Depth is a mayor important factor in the water quality of a lake. Deep lakes have summer and winter

stratification where deep areas are depleted of oxygen and surface areas are rich in oxygen. Cedar lake

does not have stratification. Dissolved oxygen and temperature were equal at all levels except for a small

layer between the bottom and a few centimeters above the substrate which was depleted on oxygen due to

natural decomposition. See Figure 6.

Figure 6. Example of lack of stratification at Cedar Lake in August 2015.

Stratification largely isolates the upper water layers (epilimnium) from the lower layers of water

(hypolimnium) and increases the interaction with the sediment during the summer. In shallow lakes,

macrophites (plant growth) will have a greater chance to grow due to shallow areas occupying large

extensions of the lake. Stratification is also responsible for nutrient and sediment mixing as the season

approaches the fall and the spring. Nitrates and phosphates are mixed within the sediment and

macrophites will utilize them for their own growth.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

0 2 4 6 8

Dissolved Oxygen Concentration Site 2

8/5/15

ppm

Linear (ppm)


Figure 7. Candlewood Lake example of stratification at Squantz Landing. Data collected in June 2015.

I have included here a graph of a typical stratified lake, in this case Squantz Landing at Candlewood

Lake with a maximum depth as shown in the graph of 11 meters. Maximum depth of Cedar Lake is only

3.5 meters. See figure 7.

Lake Seasonal Turn Over

A typical lake goes through a number of changes as the seasons advance. In the fall with air temperatures

approaching the freezing point, just before ice starts to form on the surface, water molecules approach 3.8

degrees centigrade, they are heavier than the surrounding water molecules and they sink to the bottom of

the lake. As the season advances, there is a theoretical point when the entire lake is at a temperature of

3.8. In the winter the lake stratifies and the surface is at 0 degrees centigrade (ice) and the bottom is 3.8

degrees centigrade. In the spring air temperatures warm up, the surface ice of the lake melts and water

molecules once again will travel up and down mixing the water, the sediment and the nutrients in the lake.

Water molecules travel because when water’s lowest density is at 0 degrees centigrade these water

molecules float and form ice, but just before that when they have the highest density at 3.8 degrees

centigrade they sink. In the summer the colder water molecules are found usually in the bottom and the

warmer molecules at the surface. At that time the lake is again stratified due to solar radiation. Lakes that

do not have a complete stratification will not mix as well.

Land Use Study

Open space is important to the health of the lake as undeveloped land buffers and filters the lake from

contamination. From a total of 563 acres the lake’s open space is 263 acres including the lake surface area

based on calculations I have done using Geographical Information System (GIS). This is a total of more

than 46 percent of open space. There are no leachate and waste water discharges within the lake’s

drainage area based on DEEP GIS Maps. Nevertheless, because the area around the lake is heavily

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

0 10 20 30

De

pth

in M

ete

rs

ppm of Dissolved Oxygen & Degrees C of Temperature

Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature in Squantz Landing

Dissolved Oxygen[mm/L]

Temperature [C]


populated by small homes with septic systems and spring lawn care that add nitrates and phosphates into

the lawn and consequently to the lake, all this can affect the water quality of the lake.

Chemical and Physical Information of Cedar Lake

Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature Profiles

Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen profiles were done at two selected sites, the first on 6/20/2015 and

the second time on 8/5/2015. The two sites selected were site 1 located approximately in the middle of the

lake and site 2 at the deepest location near the outlet. See Figure 8.

Figure 8. Location of sampling sites for 2015.

Results for these two Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen profiles were as follow:

Date site depth % ppm t

6/20/2015 1 0 84.7 7.38 22.6

0.5 86.4 7.46 22.6

1 86.1 7.44 22.6

1.5 86.5 7.45 22.6

2 87 7.54 22.6

2.5 87.5 7.55 22.5

6/20/2015 2 3.5 34 3.5 22.1

3 74 6.4 22.3

2.5 75 6.4 22.4

2 76 6.53 22.6

1.5 74.3 6.57 22.6

1 75.7 6.48 22.6


0.5 74.3 6.39 22.6

0 74.3 6.4 22.6

8/5/2015 1 2.5 69.1 5.65 26.5

2 71 5.7 26.6

1.5 72.2 5.81 26.6

1 73.9 5.8 26.7

0.5 73.2 5.84 26.8

0 72.4 5.79 26.7

8/5/2015 2 3.5 8 0.64 24.9

3 82.3 6.05 26.2

2.5 87.5 7.07 26.3

2 91 7.31 26.4

1.5 92.3 7.44 26.5

1 93.3 7.41 26.6

0.5 94.2 7.38 26.9

0 95 7.51 27.2

Graphs and results

Site 1 6/20/15

These two graphs show that the water at site 1 is well oxygenated at around 7.5 ppm and at a temperature

of 22 degrees centigrade. No hypoxia at this site.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

7.35 7.4 7.45 7.5 7.55 7.6


6/20/15


Site 2 6/20/15

Site 2 which the deepest point in the lake shows to have no stratification with in the 3.5 meters depth but

is also well oxygenated with no hypoxia and at a uniform temperature of 22.6 C°.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

22.48 22.5 22.52 22.54 22.56 22.58 22.6 22.62

Temperature in Cº Site 1

6/20/15

t

Linear (t)

0

1

2

3

4

0 2 4 6 8

Disolved Oxygen Concentration Site 2

6/20/15

ppm

Linear (ppm)


Site 1 8/5/15

Results on this day, which is two months after our first field day, show at site 1 to have a slight

stratification but overall the entire water column is between 5.8 and 5.6 ppm. No hypoxia at this site.

Water is slightly cooler on the surface.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

22 22.1 22.2 22.3 22.4 22.5 22.6 22.7


6/20/15

t

Linear (t)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

5.6 5.65 5.7 5.75 5.8 5.85

Dissolved Oxygen Concenttration Site 1

8/5/15

ppm

Linear (ppm)


Site 2 8/5/15

In August at site 2 oxygen levels are still very good over all, with small stratification at the very bottom

probably due to decomposition. Oxygen levels are good and temperature is two degrees warmer than at

the bottom. No hypoxia in August.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

26.4 26.5 26.6 26.7 26.8 26.9


8/5/15

t

Linear (t)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

0 2 4 6 8


8/5/15

ppm

Linear (ppm)


Conclusion on the Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature profiles

Cedar Lake, because it is so shallow, has very little or no stratification during the summer months.

Nevertheless the lake is well oxygenated and we found no hypoxia points in either of the two sites.

Oxygen levels that are higher than 5 ppm are well established throughout the lake and this is sufficient

oxygen to maintain a healthy fish and plankton community. Drops in oxygen levels on the bottom are

probably due to decomposition.

Hypoxia in lakes and Dissolved Oxygen

Oxygen in lakes is dissolved in the water mainly due to wave action and to plants in the lake such as

phytoplankton or macrophytes. In addition to microscopic plants, there are bacteria in the water and

decomposition of a variety of organic matter.

Within the first centimeters above the bottom of the lake there is a hypoxic state due to decomposition

produced by bacteria. Bacteria also act in conjunction with zooplankton throughout the lake and reduces

the oxygen content, especially in phytoplankton rich areas where zooplankton is feeding on plants.

Zooplankton consumes oxygen.

In addition, water temperature acts on oxygen content in such a way that the cooler the water is the more

oxygen can hold and the warmer the water is; the less oxygen it can hold. Cold water holds more oxygen.

Hypoxia is typical at the bottom of the lake and in areas where temperature rises.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

24.5 25 25.5 26 26.5 27 27.5


8/5/15

t

Linear (t)


Chemistry of the lake and other tests

Secci Disc and Lake Clarity

Cedar Lake water clarity ranged between 240 cm. to 162 cm. These measurements are very close to the

bottom of the lake. Because Cedar Lake is a shallow lake, measuring water clarity using a secci disc has

its disadvantages. This is done by submerging the disc until it is no longer visible. In a shallow lake this

may happen just before we touch bottom and in some cases there is insufficient depth to take a

measurement. When the disc is so close to the bottom, most of the suspended matter from the bottom can

produce a false reading.

Cedar Lake’s readings in 2004 were 253 cm. and 289 cm. Consequently clarity has deteriorated since then

by 10 to 40 cm. One of the possibilities may be due to blue green algae and especially to Microcystis and

Anasystis which we found very abundant on the lake.

I recommend next time the use of a spectrophotometric method to test the clarity of the lake. Water is

tested at different depths and the turbidity of the water is measured in NTU (Nephelometric Turbidity

Units).

Total Dissolved Solids

Results from the 2004 monitoring did not include Total Dissolved Solids readings. The readings in 2015

are between 211 and 163 ppm. that are in the normal range for Connecticut.

Alkalinity

Alkalinity is measured as dissolved Calcium Carbonate and refers to the ability of the water to buffer its

pH. In Connecticut alkalinities from water samples range from 5 ppm in the eastern side of the state to 80

ppm in the western of the state. The alkalinities ranged at Cedar Lake between 24 and 40 ppm, which are

well within the normal range for this state and location.

Conductivity

Conductivity readings from the 2004 report ranged between 160 to 177 µmhos per cm. Conductivity in

2014 was much higher between 225 to 440 µS. One µmhos equals 1 µS, they are comparable.

Conductivity in the range of 0 to 200 µS is normal for a healthy and pristine body of water. A range

between 200 to 1000 µS is the normal range for most rivers.

One reason for having higher conductivity readings may be climate change. With warmer temperatures

water evaporates and conductivity increases. We also have had a very dry summer this year. Lack of

water will also elevate the conductivity of the lake.

pH

pH readings ranged between 6.98 to 6.67. A natural lake in the Northeast of the United States would

range

between 6.5 and 7.5. The pH readings at Cedar Lake were within the normal range.


Results of the testing done on 2015

Date Site Secci Temperature TDS Conductivity Alkalinity pH

6/20/15 1 240 21.3 164 225 38 6.71

6/20/15 2 212 21.4 157 329 40 6.75

8/5/15 1 162 25.9 163 337 28 6.67

8/5/15 2 174 26.3 211 440 24 6.98

Max 1 and 2 240 26.3 211 440 40 6.98

Min 1 and 2 162 21.3 163 225 24 6.67

Avg 1 and 2 197 23.72 173.75 332.75 32.5 6.77

ST DV 1 and 2 35.72 2.74 25.02 87.83 7.72 0.13

Units cm. C° NaCl µS ppm Units

Graph comparing test results is 6/20 and 8/5. High Standard Deviation on the conductivity readings

shows high fluctuations during the summer. These differences may be as a result of higher

temperatures and lack of rain.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

6/20/2015 6/20/2015 8/5/2015 8/5/2015 Avg SD DV

Secci

Temperature

TDS

Conductivity

Alkalinity

pH


Nutrients

Data for the two collection Dates:

ND is not detectable

Date Site Depth Nitrite N Nitrate N Ammonia N T O Nitrogen TKN TN TP

6/1/2015 1A Bottom 0.01 0.2 ND 0.41 0.41 0.6 0.03

6/1/2015 1B Surface 0.022 0.3 0.08 0.2 0.28 0.6 0.03

6/1/2015 2A Bottom 0.013 0.3 0.13 0.14 0.27 0.6 0.03

6/1/2015 2B Surface 0.012 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.02

8/5/2015 1A Bottom 0.022 ND ND 0.44 0.44 0.5 0.03

8/5/2015 1B Surface 0.014 ND ND 0.53 0.53 0.5 0.01

8/5/2015 2A Bottom 0.013 ND ND 0.46 0.46 0.5 0.01

8/5/2015 2B Surface 0.003 ND ND 0.69 0.69 0.7 0.01

AVG

0.01 0.23 0.14 0.37 0.42 0.55 0.02

STDV

0.01 0.10 0.06 0.21 0.14 0.09 0.01

Tables and Graphs for the Data

ND 0.08 0.13 0.2 ND ND ND ND

0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 ND ND ND ND

0.01 0.022 0.013 0.012 0.022 0.014 0.013 0.003

Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface

1A 1B 2A 2B 1A 1B 2A 2B

6/1/2015 6/1/2015 6/1/2015 6/1/2015 8/5/2015 8/5/2015 8/5/2015 8/5/2015

Nutrient Data Cedar Lake

2015

T O Nitrogen

TKN

TN

TP


Summary of the data

Date Nitrite N Nitrate N Ammonia N T O Nitrogen TKN TN TP

AVG 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.16 0.10 0.45 0.02

STDV 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.09 0.05 0.16 0.01

Data on Nutrients Collected in 2004

Date Nitrites N Nitrates N Ammonia N

T O Nitrogen

TN TP

6/8/2004 .009 .281 .036 .366 .692 .017

6/8/2004 .008 .319 BDL .382 .709 .014

8/25/2004 .007 BLD BLD .428 .435 .012

8/25/2004 .007 BLD BLD .591 .598 .011

Graph for the Data for 2015

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

Nitrite N Nitrate N AmmoniaN

T ONitrogen

TKN TN TP

AVG

STDV


Comparison of Total Nitrates and Total Phosphates to other Lakes

Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorous is in PPM (Parts per million)

Lake Town Acreage TN TP

Cedar Lake Bristol/Wolcott 153 0.5 0.01

Batterson Park Farmington 162 0.993 0.040

1860 Reservoir Wethersfield 35 1.158 0.09

Hitchcock Lake Wolcott 118 0.580 0.022

Silver lake Berlin 151 1.119 0.137

Winnemaug Lake Watertown 120 1.893 0.048

I used the highest number recorded.

Data from: Chemical and Physical Properties of Connecticut Lakes, C.R. Frink and W.A Norvell, The

Connecticut Agricultural Experimental Station Bulleting 817 April 1984.

Lake Town Acreage TN TP

Beseck Middlefield 118 .348 .032

Emmon Pond Hartland 7 .381 .03

Linsley New Branford 22 .411 .18

Pauchaug Griswold 820 .361 .036

Silver Meriden 148 .557 .14

Data from: Connecticut Lakes. A Study of the Chemical an Physical Properties of Fifty-six Lakes in

Connecticut. Richard W. Canavan IV and Peter A. Siver. Published by the Connecticut Arboretum, 1995

Results for the Nutrients

In 2004 the Total Nitrates ranged between .435 and .709 mg/l. In 2014 results averaged 0.45 which are

very similar and comparable numbers. In 2004 the Total Phosphates ranged between 0.014 to 0.017

mg/l. In 2014 results averaged .02 mg/l which is a little higher but not enough to be of any concern.

Nutrients in the lake can be added as a result of lawn care practices or faulty septic systems. It would be

recommended that an information campaign throughout the neighborhoods adjacent to the lake be

started to inform people of the detriments of nutrients in a lake.

If we compare results to other lakes in Connecticut for Total Nitrates the results ranged between 1.8 to

.34 mg/l. Cedar Lake scores low in this comparison. For Total Phosphates, the range is between 0.02 and

.19mg/l. Cedar Lake scored 0.02 mg/l which is also in the low range.


Trophic Evaluation

Trophic level indicators according to Canavan and Silver are as follow:

Trophic Status Total Phosphates mg/l

Total Nitrates mg/l

Chlorophyll a µg/l

Secci Disc cm.

Oligotrophic <0.01 <0.2 <2 >600

Early Mesotrophic 0.01 -0.015 0.2-0.3 2-5 400-500

Mesotrophic 0.015-0.025 0.3-0.5 5-10 300-400

Late Mesotrophic 0.025-0.030 0.5-0.6 10-15 200-300

Eutrophic >0.030 >0.6 >15 100-200

Cedar Lake mesotrophic

0.02 0.45 4.8 240-162

Lakes can go from Oligotrophic to Eutrophic based on the amount of nutrients, chlorophyll a, which

represents the amount of plant growth, and turbidity. Lake’s such as Lake of the Clouds in Mt.

Washington are void of nutrients; other lakes such as Candlewood Lake are so rich in nutrients that are

Eutrophic.

Based on these results, Cedar Lake appears to fall somewhere between mesotrophic to late

mesotrophic. The discrepancy in these results is based on the fact that Canavan and Silver parameters

apply best to regular lakes with depth higher than an average of 3 meters. Cedar Lake is a shallow lake

and it acts somewhat comparable to a large wetland. If Cedar Lake was deeper I would have expected

the lake to be closer to early mesotrophic or even oligotrophic based on its geographic location.

Unfortunately, and due to the development around the lake, it scores richer in nutrients.

Plankton Sampling

The lake was sampled for plankton three times, one initial time in 6/20/15, a second sampling done in

8/5/15 and an additional sampling completed in 9/7/15 and analyzed by an independent laboratory

(Northeast Laboratories Inc.)

Plankton Samples

When sampling plankton in a lake, the sample will contain phytoplankton (plants) and zooplankton

(animals). In most cases the zooplankton sample will contain copepods and daphnia, which are

crustaceans; protozoans and rotifers. A phytoplankton sample will be made up of blue green algae,

green algae, desmids and diatoms. Cells containing chlorophyll have been classified under a number of

systems, subject too complex to be treated in this report.

Each sample was evaluated for presence of species, and a total number of cells per ml were counted.

Here is the summary of all the sampling.


Date Laboratory Total Plankton Cells

Blue Green Cell Count

Total Count

6/20/15 (1) NE Naturalist 873 20,000 20,873

6/20/15 (2) NE Naturalist 841 19,000 19,841

6/20/15 (3) NE Naturalist 852 39,000 40,873

8/5/15 (1) NE Naturalist 354 (No Blue Greens)

13.820 14,174


NC 171


NC 200

9/9/15 (1) Northeast Laboratories

1500 21,000 22,500

Total Plankton refers to total number of organims, even when the organisms contain many cells inside.

Blue green algae in many cases are made up of of many cells so, Total Count refers to all cells counted.

Microcyst for example (see pictures in the appendix) contains hundreds if not thousands of cells.

Evaluation of species present: (see pictures in the appendix)

Ceratium

Onychonema

Tabellaria

Fragilaria

Microcystis (abundant)

Coelosphaerium (abunadant)

Anacystis (abundant)

Euglena

Botryococcus

Pedastrum

Zygnema

Keratella

Copepod (Microcyclos rubellos, Cyclos

scuttifer, Dicyclops bicuspidatum)

Chlorococcus

Dinobryon

Anabaena

Diatom

Results

The Plankton community was made up mainly of blue green algae, especially Anacysts and Microcystis

which are a concern to lakes because of its toxic properties. You had similar results in 2004. For that

reason an additional sample was taken in September to make sure that the Blue Green Algae numbers

were within an acceptable range. Based on a publication, attached to this report, the Connecticut

Department of Energy and Environmental Protection have strict rules regarding abundance of certain

species to insure the health of the people using the lake for swimming and other forms of recreation.

It is also noted that there was a low diversity of species in the plankton sample of other microscopic

plankton organisms. We only collected and counted 17 species of plankton organisms in the lake and in

low numbers. We expected to find a higher diversity. A number closer to 35 or even larger and up to 100


woud be more applicable to Cedar Lake. We know that the lake is treated with herbicides to reduce the

abundance of certain macrophytes, and we also think that there is a probability that these herbicides

may be reducing the number of plankton species in the lake.

In general, the abundance and diversity of phytoplankton and zooplankton species was lower than the

numbers recorded in 2004. Dr. Ballie counts ranged between 1836 organisms to 1849. Our plankton

count was between 841- 1500.

Blue green counts when it refers to some of the very small microscopic species can be counted as

organisms made up of many cells or total individual cells. One Microscystis is made up of maybe 1000

cells. This analysis requires specialized equipment and methods not available to the Northeast Naturalist

Services; consequently in September we send a sample to be counted by an independent laboratory to

insure the health of the people that were using the lake.

General Conclusions

Cedar Lake is a shallow lake that should be studied more as a wetland than a lake. It has a tendency of

an increase of macrophytes and has very little or no stratification. Because its heavy development along

the entire perimeter of the lake, there is always a risk of the lake to be high in nutrients. Blue green

algae growth is a thread to the lake and should be monitored and controlled.

Previous monitoring of the lake was very similar to the results obtained in 2015. Chemistry of the lake is

very comparable to previous readings and recommendations provided by previous researchers stand

and should be taken into consideration.

It would be very difficult to get the town to install public sewers in the area. The only alternative is to

educate the people around the lake to flush their septic systems once year and to decrease the number

of fertilizers on the lawns.

Bibliography

Priscilla W. Bailie. Ecological Study Cedar Lake, 2004. December 7,2004

Thomas D. Brock. A Eutrophic Lake. Springer-Veriag. 1985

Richard W. Canavan IV, Peter A. Silver. Connecticut Lakes. A study of the Chemical and Physical

Properties of Fifty-six Connecticut Lakes. Published by the Connecticut College Arboretum. 1995.


C.R. Frink and W.A. Norvell. Chemical and Physical Protecties of Connecticut Lakes. The Connecticut

Agricultural Experimental Station, Bulleting 817. April 1984

Marten Scheffer. Ecology of Shallow Lakes. Kluwer Academic Publishers. 2001

Robert G. Wetzel. Limnology. Saunders College Publishers. 1983

Web Bibliography

University of New Hampshire. Image based key to the zooplankton of the Northeast of USA. Department

of Zoology. Center for fresh water biology. Durham, NH.

A. L . Baker, Marine , Estuary and Freshwater, Dept of Biological Sciences. University of New Hampshire .

Algae (PS Protosta), Cyanobacteri, and other aquatic objects. Phyto Key. Updated 21 May 2013.

Spaulding. S. A. , Lubinski, D. J. Potapova, M. (2010) Diatoms of the United States. Identification Guide

nd Ecological Resources for Diatoms of the United States. USGS.


Appendix

Content

Quality Control Project Plan

Photographs of Plankton Cell

Chemistry Test Results

Plankton testing results

Guidance to Local Health Departments


Quality Assurance Project Plan

Cedar Swamp Pond - Ecological Study

2015 (a.k.a Cedar Lake)

May 26, 2015

1. Title and Approval Page

Cedar Swamp Pond - Ecological Study 2015 (a.k.a Cedar Lake)

Cedar Lake Owners Association

May 26, 2015

Project Manager(s) - Mike Guerrera / Evan Guerrera

Project QA Officer - Joe Guarino

2. Table of Contents

Page Content

1 Sections 1 and 2

2 Sections 3, 4 and 5

3 Sections 6 and 7

4 Section 7



7 Sections 14, 15, 16, 17 1n3 18

8 Sections 19, 20, 21, 22, 13, 24 and 25


3. Distribution List

Dan Houlihan (860) 583-6962 [email protected]

Celina Bunn (860) 589-8679 [email protected]

Gail Schmidt (860) 845-8052 [email protected]

Sue Guerrera (203) 879-6823 [email protected]

Andre Dorval (860) 583-7867 [email protected]

Pat Zailckas [email protected]

Mike Glanovsky (203) 879-1389 [email protected]

Wayne Weinberger [email protected]

Joe Geladino (860) 582-8500 [email protected]

Matt Smith (203) 879-1383 [email protected]

Joe Guarino (860) 232-5575 [email protected]

Gregory Laviero (860) 589-6271 [email protected]

Jim Albert (203) 509-8555 [email protected]

Roxanne Martin (860) 582-1261 [email protected]

Mike Guerrera (203) 879-1905 [email protected]

Evan Guerrera (203) 217-1610 [email protected]

4. Project/Task Organization

Alberto Mimo, North East Naturalist Services - Advisory Panel

Mike Guerrera / Evan Guerrera - Project Manager(s)

Joe Guarino – QA Officer

Mike Guerrera – Field/Sampling Leader

CT Testing Laboratories (Name TBD) – Laboratory Manager/Leader Helen Geoghegan

mailto:[email protected]

















5. Problem Definition/Background

A. Problem Statement

Cedar Swamp Pond is a 143 acre lake, located in the towns of Wolcott and Bristol. It

was sampled on 1997, 2000, 2002 and 2004. The objective of this plan is to provide

methods and materials for a new sampling regime to take place in June and August of

2015.

B. Intended Usage of Data Education of Cedar Lake Owners Association Members regarding the water quality and ecological condition of Cedar Lake

Provide data to develop an Action Plan to improve the environment condition of Cedar Lake in the future.

6. Project/Task Description

A. General Overview of Project

Project will include the following studies:

Two sampling site at the following coordinates:

o 41˚ 38.508, -72˚ 58.121

o 41˚38.240. -72˚ 58.161

At each site we will collect, one epilimniom and one hypolimniom water

samples on 6/1/15 and 8/5/15 to be tested by a certified laboratory. Samples

will be tested for NO3-N, NO2-N, NH4, TON, TKN, TN, TP.

On 6/20/15 and on 8/5/15 we will complete a Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature

Profile, test for Conductivity, pH and Alkalinity also at the already mention

sites.

On 8/5/15 a Plankton sample will be collected and analyzed to total counts and

species content.

B. Project Timetable


Activity Projected Start Date Anticipated Date of

Completion

Water Collections and

Laboratory Tests

6/1/15 6/1/15

Oxygen Profile, pH and

Alkalinity testing

6/20/15 6/20/15

Water Collections and

Laboratory Tests

8/5/15 8/5/15

Oxygen Profile, pH and

Alkalinity testing

8/5/15 8/5/15

Plankton Sampling and

analysis

8/5/15 9/15/15

7. Measurement Quality Objectives

A. Data Precision, Accuracy, Measurement Range

Matrix Parameter Measurement Range Accuracy Precision

Water NO3

Water NO2

Water NH4

Water TON

Water TKN

Water TN

Water TP


Water Dissolved Oxygen 0 – 15 ppm 1.0 ppm 99 %

Water Temperature 5 – 25 Celsius 0.5 ˚ 99 %

Water Alkalinity 1 – 80 ppm 4 ppm 99 %

Water Conductivity 1 - µs/cm 10 µs/cm 99 %

Water pH 1 – 14 Units 0.05 Units 95 %

Water Plankton ±10 X 6 Units 200 Units 90 %

B. Data Representativeness

Samples will be taken from the center of the lake and from the deepest point near the dam,

This represents about 20 % of the complete lake profile but due to timeline and money

constrains their sampling will be adequate.

C. Data Comparability

Data will be compared to the previous sampling studies done by CT Testing Laboratories

(Name TBD) .

D. Data Completeness

Parameter No. Valid Samples

Anticipated

No. Valid Samples

Collected & Analyzed

Percent

Complete

Nutrients 8 8 100 %

Dissolved Oxygen/

Temperature

2 2 100 %

Alkalinity 8 8 100 %


pH 8 8 100%

Conductivity 8 8 100 %

8. Training Requirements and Certification

A. Training Logistical Arrangements

Types of Volunteer Training Frequency of Training

Water Samples Collection 2 Times

Dissolved Oxygen/ Temperature Profile 2 Times

Testing for pH, Conductivity and Alkalinity 2 Times

Plankton Collection 1 Time

B. Description of Training and Trainer Qualifications

Training will be complete in the field the same day of the collection of samples. In addition

reading material will be hand out or sent via Internet.

Trainer holds a BA and MS in Aquatic Biology from Central Connecticut State

University and 40 years of experience working for the Connecticut Department of

Environmental Protection, ten of them as Director of the Environmental Research

Center. He has attended dozens of training workshops and environmental conferences during

his career including the New England Association of Environmental Biologist which takes

place every year.

9. Documentation and Records

All documentation and records will be kept under the custody of the Advisor and copies of all

documentation will be done for the Project Manager.

10. Sampling Process Design

A. Rationale for Selection of Sampling Sites

We have selected the same sites that we selected in previous reports to make this study

comparable with previous information

.


B. Sample Design Logistics

Type of

Sample/Parameter

Number of

Samples

Sampling

Frequency

Sampling

Period

Biological Plankton 2 samples Once none

Physical Temperature, pH

and Conductivity

4 Samples Twice 2 Months

Chemical NO3-N, NO2-N,

NH4, TON, TKN,

TN, TP

4 Samples Twice 2 Months

11. Sampling Method Requirements

12. Sample Handling and Custody Procedures

Nutrient samples will be placed in laboratory containers and under ice and delivered

same day.

Plankton samples will be fixed with Lugol’s solution.

Samples will be studied under microscope using standard methods to study plankton

samples.

13. Analytical Methods Requirements

Analytical methods used by Certified Laboratory. CT Testing Laboratories (Name TBD) –

Laboratory Manager/Leader Helen Geoghegan.

Dissolved Oxygen/Temperature Profile according to basic Limnology standard methods as they

appear on Robert G. Wetzel, and Gene E. Likens in Limnological Analyses, Second Edition Spring-

Verlag ISBN 3-540-97331-1

Plankton Analyses using basic Limnology standard methods as they appear on Robert G. Wetzel,

and Gene E. Likens in Limnological Analyses, Second Edition Spring-Verlag ISBN 3-540-97331-1

Parameter Sampling Equipment Sampling Method

Nutrient chemistry Barn Door Bottle and Certified

Laboratory

Two sample: One just below the

surface and one just above the bottom

Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature YSI Reading from bottom up at every .5

meters

Conductivity Meter Oakton Meter Meter

pH Meter Oakton Meter Meter

Alkalinity LaMotte Wet Chemistry

Plankton 363 um Plankton Net, Millipore

Filtering System

Standard Methods


14. Quality Control Requirements

A. Field QC Checks

All equipment will be calibrated according to manufacture specifications for YSI and

Okton Meters, before leaving the dock.

C. Laboratory QC Checks Based according to specifications by CT Testing Laboratories (Name TBD) – Laboratory

Manager/Leader Helen Geoghegan

D. Data Analysis QC Checks

Comparison to data obtained in 2004 by Priscilla W. Baillie Ph.D.

We will also compare results to other lakes according to publication of Connecticut

Lakes. A Study of the Chemical and Physical Properties of Fifty-six Connecticut Lakes

by Richard W. Canavan IV and Peter A Siver. Published by the Connecticut College

Arboretum. ISBN 1-878899-04-X

15. Instrument/Equipment Testing, Inspections, and Maintenance

Requirements

Equipment Type Inspection Frequency Type of Inspection

YSI Meter Before Use Manufactures specifications

Oakton pH meter Before Use Manufactures specifications

Oakton Conductivity meter Before Use Manufactures specifications

16. Instrument Calibration and Frequency

Equipment Type Calibration Frequency Standard or Calibration Instrument Use

YSI Meter Before Use Manufactures specifications

Oakton pH meter Before Use Manufactures specifications

Oakton Conductivity meter Before Use Manufactures specifications

17. Inspection/Acceptance Requirements

All equipment to be used will be provided by The North East Naturalist Services, or by the CT

Testing Laboratories (Name TBD) – Laboratory Manager/Leader Helen Geoghegan


18. Data Acquisition Requirements

Reports provided by the Marine and Freshwater Research Services

USGS Water Quality Data

CT Department of Energy and Environmental Protection

Other publications

19. Data Management

Data will be collected in the field, transcribed to special data notebook and copied when

returning to the dock. All data will be recorded in an excel file for later analyses. Excel file will be

shared with the Project Manager to insure elimination of errors.

20. Assessment and Response Actions

Review of Cedar Swamp Pond (aka Cedar Lake) field activities is the responsibility of the Field

Leader (Mike Guerrera), in conjunction with the Project Managers (Mike Guerrera and Evan

Guerrera) and the Quality Assurance Officer (Joe Guarino). The field team will accompanied or

include the Field Leader and Project Manager(s). If possible, all volunteers will attend yearly

training renewal training if needed. If errors in sampling techniques are consistently identified,

retraining my scheduled more frequently.

21. Reports

A final report will be provided by the North East Naturalist Services in December 2015.

22. Data Review, Validations and Verification

All Cedar Swamp Pond (aka Cedar Lake) field and laboratory data is reviewed by the Project

Managers, QA Officer and Data Processing leader to determine if the data meet QAPP

objectives.


23. Validation and Verification Methods

As part of the Cedar Swamp Pond (aka Cedar Lake) protocol, any sample readings out of the

expected range are reported to the Field Leader. A second sample is taken by the Field Leader

as soon as possible to verify the condition. Ten to twenty percent of the plankton/macro

invertebrate samples are re-identified as a method of verifying data and ensuring data quality.

If an error of greater than 5% is found, all samples from that sampling period will be re-

identified and the personnel will be retrained.

Once the data has been entered into the Cedar Swamp Pond (aka Cedar Lake) database, the

Data Processing Leader will print out the data and proofread it against the original data sheets.

Errors in the data entry will be corrected as appropriate. Outliers and inconsistencies will be

identified for further review, or eliminated. Problems with data quality will be discussed in the

interim and final report to data users.

24. Reconciliation with Data Quality Objectives

As soon as possible after each sampling event, calculations and determinations for precision,

completeness, and accuracy will be made and corrective action implemented as needed. If data

quality indicators do not meet the project’s specifications, data may be eliminated and

resampling may occur. The cause of failure will be determined and evaluated. If the cause is

found to be equipment failure, calibration techniques will be reassessed and improved upon. If

the problem is found to be a sampling error, personnel will be retrained. Any limitations on

data use will be detailed in both interim and final reports, and other documentation as needed.

If failure to meet project specifications is found to be unrelated to equipment, methods, or

sample error, specifications may be revised for the next sampling season. Revisions will be

submitted to the state and EPA quality assurance officers for approval if appropriate.

[Type text] Page 0

Pictures of Some of the Planktonic

Organism Found

Unidentified Zooplankton

Coelospaerium

Pedrastrum

Fragilaria

Onychonoroema

Coelosoaerrium


Keratella

Exoskeleton of Zooplakton

Filamentous Algae

Coelospaerium

Microcystis

Microscystis


Copepod

Micrasterias

Microscystis

Microcystis

Tabellaria

Filamentous Algae


Botryococcus

Unknown

Nocticula

Microcystis

Navicula

Goniochloris


Goniochloris

Anabaena

Pedarstrim

Tabellaria

Onychorioema

Microcystis


Microcystis

Onychonoema

Copepod

Kerotella

General Picture

General Picture


Fragilaria

Dinobryon

Dinobryon

Diatom

Coelosperium

Chlorococcus


Ceratium

Botryococcus

Anabaena

Zygnema

Documents

LIMNOLOGY STUDY OF CEDAR LAKE 2015 BRISTOL ...LIMNOLOGY STUDY OF CEDAR LAKE 2015 BRISTOL AND WOLCOTT, CT Alberto F. Mimo The Northeast Naturalist Services 55 Talmadge Hill Rd. Prospect,